H2H data updated: 2026-07-18 17:48 UTC
Nathalie Dechy vs Anna Smashnova H2H: 1-1
Nathalie Dechy and Anna Smashnova are tied 1–1 in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Anna Smashnova leads 1–0 on clay, while Nathalie Dechy leads 1–0 on hard courts. Most recently, Anna Smashnova won the 2004 Berlin third round 1-6 6-4 6-1.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
FRA
Age 47
Right-Handed
178 cm / 5'10"
H2H
1
–
1
2 main draw meetings
ISR
Age 50
Right-Handed
157 cm / 5'2"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 6, 2004* | Berlin | WTA 1000 | R32 | Clay | Anna Smashnova | 1-6 6-4 6-1 | Nathalie Dechy | Match data |
| Mar 13, 2004* | Indian Wells | WTA 1000 | R32 | Hard | Nathalie Dechy | 7-5 6-4 | Anna Smashnova | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nathalie Dechy | #88 | #11 | 1,773 | 1,917 | 291 | 270 | 51.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Anna Smashnova | #994 | #15 | 1,616 | 1,882 | 242 | 221 | 52.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Nathalie Dechy | Anna Smashnova | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1991 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #264 | 1,492 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1992 | 1–2 | 33.3% | #236 | 1,489 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | 1995 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #237 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 | 1993 | 0–1 | 0.0% | #139 | 1,485 | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | 1996 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #84 | 1,501 | 0 | 0 | 1994 | 10–11 | 47.6% | #47 | 1,599 | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | 1997 | 6–11 | 35.3% | #73 | 1,539 | 0 | 0 | 1995 | 8–12 | 40.0% | #68 | 1,574 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 1998 | 12–17 | 41.4% | #50 | 1,619 | 0 | 0 | 1996 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #132 | 1,560 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1999 | 32–23 | 58.2% | #25 | 1,790 | 0 | 0 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 21 | 2000 | 28–19 | 59.6% | #26 | 1,777 | 0 | 0 | 1998 | 12–14 | 46.2% | #49 | 1,582 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2001 | 21–25 | 45.7% | #43 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 1999 | 21–23 | 47.7% | #47 | 1,637 | 0 | 1 |
| 23 | 2002 | 33–24 | 57.9% | #20 | 1,770 | 0 | 0 | 2000 | 25–23 | 52.1% | #46 | 1,668 | 0 | 2 |
| 24 | 2003 | 31–18 | 63.3% | #29 | 1,819 | 0 | 1 | 2001 | 13–19 | 40.6% | #88 | 1,605 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | 2004 | 33–23 | 58.9% | #21 | 1,810 | 0 | 1 | 2002 | 43–25 | 63.2% | #16 | 1,793 | 0 | 6 |
| 26 | 2005 | 40–26 | 60.6% | #12 | 1,798 | 0 | 1 | 2003 | 37–21 | 63.8% | #16 | 1,857 | 0 | 8 |
| 27 | 2006 | 16–25 | 39.0% | #48 | 1,649 | 0 | 1 | 2004 | 28–23 | 54.9% | #32 | 1,732 | 0 | 9 |
| 28 | 2007 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #68 | 1,651 | 0 | 1 | 2005 | 24–16 | 60.0% | #43 | 1,745 | 0 | 11 |
| 29 | 2008 | 13–16 | 44.8% | #69 | 1,670 | 0 | 1 | 2006 | 16–16 | 50.0% | #63 | 1,700 | 0 | 12 |
| 30 | 2009 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #88 | 1,582 | 0 | 1 | 2007 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #921 | 1,648 | 0 | 12 |